Cuomo Wants End To Wilson-Pakula

Gov. Andrew Cuomo unveiled his latest anti-corruption proposals this afternoon with the goal of creating an independent monitor at the Board of Elections to root out campaign finance violations, repeal Wilson-Pakula and allow voters to switch their party affiliation in a more timley fashion.

Ending Wilson-Pakula would be a significant blow to the clout of the leadership of the state’s influential minor parties who grant the waivers for candidates of major parties to run on their ballot lines. Cuomo said he does not support ending cross-party endorsements, meaning major party candidates could still have fusion ballot lines in a general election.

The Working Families, Conservative Party and Independence Party all hold varying degress of sway over the state’s Democratic and Republican parties, pushing either organization to the political left or right. The state’s other minor party with ballot access, the Green Party, does not accept cross-party endorsements.

Cuomo, who ran on the WFP and Independence Party lines in 2010 (He accepted the WFP line only after the U.S. attorney’s office ended its investigation of the party’s for-profit arm Data and Field Services without charges) said he was aware the WFP’s leadership was opposed to ending Wilson-Pakula.

A repeal to the 1947 law puts Cuomo at odds with Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, who said today he does not support ending the waivers.

“I don’t think we should preclude people from running on more than one line,” Silver said at a news conference today. “They’re only allowed to registered in one party. There has to be a mechanism for us — for people — to gain duel endorsements or more.”

The proposal comes after Sen. Malcolm Smith and five others were arrested in an alleged bribery scheme in order to secure ballot access for the Republican mayoral line through the Wilson-Pakula process. Even with ending the waiver and its new prominence following the Smith arrest, Wilson-Pakula is still very much inside baseball for politicos as the governor is essentially picking a fight with minor party bosses that could have broader implications down the road.

Though it’s the second set of reform proposals made public by the governor since two back-to-back corruption scandals swept through state government this month, Cuomo said he has no plans to put his specifics into print through a program bill, least it hurt an agreement.

“I will give you a hint: Normally when we release bill language before an agreement that means the probablity of that bill passing is very, very low,” Cuomo said. “Bill language, to put forth specifics when you don’t have an agreement polarizes the parties. It makes it harder to come to an agreement because you’ve pushed people to their respective corners. I’ve found that counterproductive.”

Pushed somewhat on whether that was good for the legislative process, Cuomo said noted the broad strokes of the plan have been announced.

“They can judge the proposals. I’m just not going to say four and you say six,” Cuomo said.

Cuomo previously announced a plan to tighten anti-bribery laws and require public officials aware of corrupt actions to report it to law enforcement. Those proposals have not made it into print, either.

Meanwhile, Cuomo is shifting on a 2010 campaign proposal that would give the state attorney general’s office power to investigate campaign finance violations. Instead, Cuomo is now proposing an independent counsel at the Board of Elections.

The governor would nominate the counsel, who would then be subject to Senate confirmation.

Cuomo said the move is not as shift despite promising it in his 2010 ethics reform policy book.

But the governor said having the independent counsel is preferable for legislators as opposed to having an elected official with such oversight.

“The opposing party has a legitimate interest in making sure I don’t pick a partisan Democrat,” Cuomo said. “They’re trying to say I don’t want a partisan doing the quote-end-quote independent enforcement because maybe a Democrat would play politics. That’s a legitimate concern they would have. My solution is I pick, you confirm. If they’re not independent, then I’ll find another candidate.”

Cuomo said he would continue to push for publicly financed campaigns, but wouldn’t commit to veto a package that doesn’t have a public matching system.

“I want public financing,” Cuomo said.

Pushed on whether that means he would veto a package without public financing Cuomo said, “It’s always the way. There are always laws that I wished were passed that aren’t passed. I don’t think there’s been a perfect legislative session for me, but I continue to strive.”

This entry was posted by Nick Reisman on April 16, 2013 at 4:38 pm, and is filed under Andrew Cuomo. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

http://MichaelBenjamin2012.wordpress.com/ Michael A. Benjamin

How would the independent counsel differ from the current salaried bi-partisan counsels at the SBOE? Another salary and benefits. Empowering the state AG is much more preferable and cost effective. But who wants to give ES headlines, right?